COMPLIANCE INFO_1971-1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

AGENDA RAORT Agenda Item No. 6.6 UPN -96-11, WEAVER COMPOSTING FACILITY SIX MONTH REVIEW; MODIFICATION OF CONDITIONS; AND/ OR CONTINUATION; MODIFICATION OR REVOCATION OF THE PERMIT, 2403 W. LOUISE AVENUE, HAROLD ROUSE There are two businesses that occupy the 2403 W. Louise Avenue site, Weaver Industries and Biotechnologies, Inc. (BTI). Weaver Industries operations consist of chipping and grinding of green waste, while BTI operations are vermicomposting, mulching and composting. While both businesses operate under SPC -96-5 and UPN -96=11, the applicant or responsible party for these permits is Weaver Industries. Staff has conducted a required six month review of UPN -96-11 and compiled the accompanying comprehensive list of all conditions of approval and their status. Over the last few months, City staff has been diligently working with the applicant to achieve compliance. We have detailed the conditions and their status. Staff has also been open to modifications to the permit if need be, and to providing the applicant with ample time to complete the conditions. Yet, staff finds that one year after the site has been annexed to the City the applicantstiffcontinues operations under a permit out of compliance with no indication of improvement. The purpose of granting the six month review and report was to allow ample time for the project to achieve conformance. However, not only are a large number of conditions unmet, but the applicant has not offered any commitment either with a program or a schedule, for completion of the remaining conditions. The applicant has been fully informed on several occasions over the past six months as to the importance of completing the conditions and prior to the forthcoming six month review. At this point staff feels it is necessary to consider revocation of the permit. Since it is an operating industry, revocation is not an action that staff takes lightly. Unfortunately, by not complying with the conditions of approval, the operation is neither a responsible corporate citizen nor a good neighbor. Continued operation in violation of City codes creates an undesirable precedent, as well as the perception that the codes apply only to those who choose to abide by them. The following options are available to the Commission: 1. Continug Working With The AR licant. Grant the applicant additional time to complete the conditions. City staff will continue to inspect the premise and advise the applicant if a condition is met and, if not, how to go about meeting the condition. Compliance is the burden of the applicant. This option should include automatic revocation of the use permit. At the end of the extension period as well as some type of performance bond in an amount which would enable the City to restore the site, if the permit is revoked. 2. Modify the Site Plan and Use Permit Conditions. 'Staff has reviewed the list of the conditions and found that the majority of conditions are Zoning Ordinance requirements and cannot be waived. If a condition is burdensome and there is another way to achieve this desired result, then staff would consider a modification, provided it is in compliance with Title 17. The applicant has not presented any proposals for modification to staff. If the Commission wishes to pursue this option, it will be necessary to continue this matter so modifications may be proposed. 7-29-97 Planning Commission Meeting